Wan,

Interesting. I’m a little suspect about the maindeck level VLS on this hull, per the alternate artwork, as my view would be that the US designers wouldnt have gone with the on-deck ESSM fit had space been available below for at least self-defence length silos. The minimum-change theory was why I’d have looked at A35 tubes or FLAADS bespoke maindeck up, with a deckhouse thrown around, for the ship the way I had it.

I see what you are saying with the RAM F122 style. Indeed that would look like a solution and a much simpler one than needing to fit the VLS forward. A Strales mount forward plus a Mk144 launcher on each beam atop the hangar would make the ship a somewhat tough nut to crack from the air. I have to admit my concept was leaning in the direction of FLAADS and screening of MSO ops in an extended ‘local area’ against an air threat as opposed to pure point defence!.

Edit: Hadnt seen the model with a VLS for’d of the bridge before!. Makes me the idiot! 🙂

The NSC appears to already have space/weight reserved for a VLS behind the 57mm, if I’m not mistaken (don’t quite know what that big white ‘hatch’ could else be)! Now, if that is with an 8-round Mk41 Self Defence module in mind, you’re talking 32x the 50km ESSM which, when coupled with CEAFAR/CEAMOUNT, could give you a fair bit of ‘local area’. Otherwise it is 1x or maybe 2x 6-cell Mk48 Mod 3 / Mk56 Mod 0, giving eg ‘just’ 12-24 ESSM when used with dualpack DP48 canisters. Using the 21-round RAM launchers and Strales gives a nice inner ‘point defence’ layer. However, considering the total dependence on the CEAFAR/CEAMOUNT that would entail, it may be preferable to use the ‘self contained’ SeaRAMs, even if that means going down to 11 missile rounds per unit. Or to back up the inner layer fire units (76mm, Mk144 RAM launchers) with electro-optical fire directing devices. I’m not sure why tripl ASW tubes would need to be in the rear (and only on one beam) as they could possibly also be mounted on the main deck just forward of the superstructure or immediately aft of the hangars. Thus, imho, the tail of the NSC could be fully retained complete with 2 RIBs. Though it depends on whether TAS is used. I would dispense with any manually aimed of HMGs and use only RC devices e.g. Mini-Typhoon. It should probably receive at least one remote controlled light (25-35mm) cannon. Rather than atop the hangar, Harpoon could be on the forward main deck, Anzac HMAS Perth style.

Source ESSM / GMLS https://www.natoseasparrow.org/Consortium%20Products%20Handbook%20Rev%20-1.pdf

PF4501 OPV that is nearly identical to the USCG’s NSC design, albeit with some minor changes in the stern section.

Range 12,000 nautical miles
Endurance 60 days.
Weapons: 1x Bofors 57mm gun, 1x 20mm Phalanx CIWS, 6x crew served 12.7mm HMG
Sensors: 3D radar, optronic systems.
Aviation: 2x SH-60 size helicopters or 1 helicopter plus 1 UAV.
Complement: 148
Comes with bow thruster

PF4921 light frigate, featuring a more extensive set of changes over the NSC. It sacrifices range for enhanced combat capabilities.

Range 8,000 nautical miles
Endurance 40 days.
Weapons: 1x Otobreda 76mm, 1x 20mm Phalanx or SeaRAM CIWS, 6x 12.7mm HMG (some remote control), vertical launch unit for ESSM, 2×4 Harpoon, 1x triple tubes launcher for lightweight ASW torpedoes.
Sensors: 3D radar, optronic systems. Sensors shown include CEAFAR / CEAMOUNT radar system, hull mounted sonar, towed array sonar.
Aviation: 2x SH-60 size helicopters or 1 helicopter plus 1 UAV.
Complement: 141
No bow thruster

Both designs share hull form and propulsion of the NSC.
Principal dimensions
length 418 feet/127.4 meters
beam 54 feet/16.5 meters
draft 22 feet/6.7 meters
displacement 4,600 metric tons.

CODOG propulsion system (1x LM 2500 gas turbine, 2x MTU 20V 1163 diesels) Twin-screw operations with any one of the engines. Respective top speeds:
18 knots on single diesel
24 knots on both diesels
26 knots on (quiet) GTU alone
28+ knots on all engines (NSC attained 30)
Cruising speed: around 10 knots.

http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/stories/patrol-frigate-concepts-from-huntington-ingalls-industries-gain-traction-internationally/
http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/stories/the-national-security-cutter-a-critical-asset-in-homeland-and-regional-security/

http://bemil.chosun.com/nbrd/bbs/view.html?b_bbs_id=10040&pn=1&num=63867

CEAFAR/CEAMOUNT ON HMAS PERTH PICS: http://blog.daum.net/trent/8212970
INFOS: http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/news/ontarget/oct05/nb6.cfm

A little under armed for a Navy ship, but for the Coast Guard….?

Well, I did say “Patrol frigate seems a little under armed though.” and not “national security cutter” … 😀

Mercurius, on one hand you are correct, on the other hand, the whole concept of intellectual property is flawed, IMHO.

I personally don’t quite see why an author of a book should be paid royalties everytime someone gets to buy his work but a designer of a bridge should not expect royalties from everyone crossing his work? Where is the difference? Finally, designing and building a bridge is exactly as “intellectual” as writing a book, isn’t it? Which does bridge builder only get his contract-fixed price but a book author also expects royalties for a lifetime?

TOLL BRIDGE!?!?!
+
Is a bridge designed by a SINGLE person?

Interesting, but what is the objective of stationing a UK heli on a French ship? Will we see reverse deployments? And then what?

From among a nice series of pic of 1144 Kirov ( http://kuleshovoleg.livejournal.com/100859.html ):

Norway is purchasing the EH-101?

CHeck link:

Norway has expressed an interest in the AW101 as a candidate for the Norwegian All Weather Search and Rescue Helicopter (NAWSARH) programme that plans replacement of the Westland Sea King Mk.43B of the Royal Norwegian Air Force in 2015.[37] The other candidates for the NAWSARH contract of 10–12 helicopters are Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey, Eurocopter EC225, NHIndustries NH-90 and Sikorsky S-92.[38] Iceland also cooperates with Norway in this programme and is interested in 3–4 helicopters to replace its fleet of Super Puma helicopters.[39]

By April 2009, more than 180 AW101s had been sold. 15% of all AW101s sold have been for VIP purposes. In August 2012, it was reported that Algeria had signed an agreement with AgustaWestland for the provision of up to 80 helicopters, including 42 AW101s.

Algeria: 6 + 42 + local assembly
Canada: 15
Denmark: 14
India: 12
Italy: 22+12
Japan: 14 + 1+ licence production
Portugal: 12
Saudi Arabia: 2
Turkmenistan:2
UK: 44+22+6=72
TOTAL=226
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AgustaWestland_AW101

NH90 customers:
Australia
Belgium
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Italy*
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway*
Oman
Oman
Portugal*
Spain
Sweden

* countries acquiring both EH101 and NH90